Bible Facts: Q & A (Cont.)

Important
Notice: We make no guarantees regarding any item herein. Do
not take items out of context. Do not inflict harm on yourself
or others, break laws, take unsuitable/incautious or
inappropriate/drastic actions, or take figurative items
literally. Use of site is at your own risk and is subject to our
terms of use. For more terms information, see below
and click
here

A.
No. This error was CONDEMNED by Pope St. Pius X in "Lamentabili":
"The Church's interpretation of the Sacred Books is not indeed to
be spurned, but it is subject to the more accurate judgment and the
correction of exegetes." (Pope St. Pius X, This proposition was
condemned in "Lamentabili", 1907 A.D.)

Furthermore,
the First Vatican Council states that, "For the doctrine of the
faith which God has revealed is put forward not as some philosophical
discovery capable of being perfected by human intelligence, but as a
divine deposit committed to the spouse of Christ to be faithfully
protected and infallibly promulgated. Hence, too, that meaning of the
sacred dogmas is ever to be maintained which has once been declared by
Holy Mother Church, and there must never be any abandonment of this
sense under the pretext or in the name of a more profound understanding.
May understanding, knowledge and wisdom increase as ages and centuries
roll along, and greatly and vigorously flourish, in each and all, in the
individual and the whole church: but this only in its own proper kind,
that is to say, in the same doctrine, the same sense, and the same
understanding."

A.
There is no opposition between Scripture and Church dogmas. This error
was CONDEMNED by Pope St. Pius X in "Lamentabili":
"Opposition can and actually does exist between facts which are
narrated in Sacred Scripture, and the dogmas of the Church based on
these, so that a critic can reject as false, facts which the Church
believes to be most certain." (Pope St. Pius X, This proposition
was condemned in "Lamentabili", 1907 A.D.)

A.
The Apocalypse (or Revelation) uses a special literary style that can be
especially difficult to understand. The reader should be aware that
certain items are not to be taken literally, that the book is rich in
symbolism, that the time frame may not be linear, and that elements of
it may be applicable to the past, present, and future. Furthermore,
Catholics should not fall into the anti-Catholic trap of associating
Rome in the Apocalypse with the Catholic Church in Rome. At the time
that the
Apocalypse was written, the writer, St. John, had as his point of
reference old pagan Rome which persecuted the Christians, not Christian
[that is, Catholic] Rome.

A.
No. As indicated in the Bible, both oral and written tradition are to be
followed (see 2 Thes. 2:15). Furthermore, the bible could never have
been considered the sole rule of faith for a variety of other reasons
[e.g. it didn't exist for many years, it wasn't formally determined for
four centuries, it was difficult to propagate without copiers / printing
presses / etc. for most of the history of Christianity, Christianity
pre-dated the bible, historically a large number of people have been
illiterate, the Apostles were commissioned to preach not to write, faith
comes through hearing (see Rom. 10:17), not reading, original
manuscripts no longer exist, the Bible requires an authority even for
its existence, the concept of 'bible alone' is not biblical, etc.]

Note:
Click here for more on this
topic (apologetics/Non-Catholics Section).

A.
The Catholic Church is not "bible only" because being
"bible only" is not biblical (such a theory actually
contradicts expressed teachings in Holy Scripture) and is not what
Christ intended. Rather, it is an error held by heretics. The Church
existed before the Bible and could have existed without it had God not
chosen to give it to her. On the other hand, the Bible couldn't exist
without the Church, who received, determined, and preserved it. Remember
that none of the earliest Christians read the Bible, nor did the
completed Bible exist for many years. As Archbishop Fulton Sheen stated,
"If we had lived in the first twenty-five years of the Church, how
would we have answered this question: 'How can I know what I am to
believe?' We could not have said, 'I will look in the Bible.' For there
was no New Testament Bible then. We would have believed what the
Apostolic Church was teaching, and, until the invention of printing, it
would have been difficult for any of us to have made ourselves so-called
infallible private interpreters of the book."

A.
No. Christianity does not depend upon the Bible. In fact, Christianity
[that is, Catholicism] existed before a word of New Testament Scripture
was ever written. Rather, the Apostles were commissioned to preach.
Furthermore, it took decades for the books of the New Testament to be
completed and centuries before the canon of the New Testament was
settled. As Archbishop Fulton Sheen states, "The Church was spread
throughout the entire Roman Empire before a single book of the New
Testament was written. There were already many martyrs in the Church
before there were either Gospels or Epistles. An authoritative and
recognized ministry was carrying on the Lord's work at His command,
speaking in His name as witnesses of what they had seen, before anyone
decided to write a single line of the New Testament." While it is
true that Christianity did not depend upon the Bible, it is also true
that the Bible DID depend upon Christianity. Again Archbishop Fulton
Sheen states, "When finally the Gospels were written, they recorded
a tradition, they did not create it. It was already there. After a while
men had decided to put in writing this living tradition and voice, which
explains the beginning of the Gospel of Luke: 'That thou mayest know the
verity of those words in which thou hast been instructed.' The Gospels
did not start the Church; the Church started the Gospels. The Church did
not come out of the Gospels; the Gospels came out of the Church. The
Church preceded the New Testament, not the New Testament the Church.
First there was not a Constitution of the United States, and then Americans, who in the light of that Constitution
decided to form a government and a nation. The Founding Fathers preceded
the Foundation; so the Mystical Body of Christ preceded the reports
written later by inspired secretaries. And incidentally, how do we know
the Bible is inspired? It does not say is! Matthew does not conclude his
Gospel saying: 'Be sure to read Mark; he is inspired, too.' Furthermore,
the Bible is not a book. It is a collection of seventy-three books in all.
It is worth opening a Bible to see if we have them all and have not been
cheated. These widely scattered books cannot bear witness to their own
inspiration. It is only by something outside the Bible that we know it
is inspired." (Archbishop Fulton Sheen)

A.
No. The earliest Christians did not read a Bible because it did not yet
exist. It took decades for all the writings of the Bible to exist and
centuries for the Church to formally enumerate the 'canon' of the Bible.
Furthermore, the earliest Christians were mostly illiterate and there
was no way to easily propagate Bibles.

A.
No. In various places, the Bible speaks also of oral tradition. For
example, consider...

"Therefore,
brothers, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were
taught, either by an oral statement or by a letter of ours." (St.
Paul, 2 Thes. 2:15)

"The
other matters I shall set in order when I come." (St. Paul, 1 Cor.
11:34)

"Although
I have much to write to you, I do not intend to use paper and ink.
Instead, I hope to visit you and to speak face to face so that our joy
may be complete." (St. John, 2 Jn. 1:12)

As
St. Epiphanius states, "The holy Apostles handed down some things
in the Scriptures, other things in Tradition." (of Salamis, c. 374
A.D.)

As
the Second Vatican Council states, "Consequently it is not from
Sacred Scripture alone that the Church draws her certainty about
everything which has been revealed. Therefore both sacred tradition and
Sacred Scripture are to be accepted and venerated with the same sense of
devotion and reverence... Sacred tradition and sacred scripture form one
sacred deposit of the word of God, which is committed to the
Church."

A.
No. As Scripture states, faith comes from hearing (see Rom. 10:17). This
is further proven by the fact that the earliest Christians, who
certainly had faith, never had Bibles (in fact, the New Testament
scripture took decades to complete and most people were illiterate).

A.
No. Remember that throughout most of the past 2,000 years, many persons were illiterate and there was no easy way to propagate the Bible. For most of the Bible's existence, there were no printing presses or copiers. Rather, Bibles had to be laboriously hand-copied at great effort & expense.

A.
First, note that far from prohibiting vernacular translations, the
Church actually produced a number of translations in the language of the
people (contrary to the arguing of some heretics). Second, note that most
of the people who could read were able to read Latin, the language of
the Vulgate edition of the Bible, so translations were far less
necessary. Lastly, note that there was a time when the Church prohibited vernacular translations - but this was not to keep people from reading the Bible, but rather because the translations were poor, and they were therefore dangerous to the faithful. It should be noted that it is a
monumental task to accurately translate Scripture into the vernacular,
especially before modern technology was available.

Some
relevant quotations follow...

"We
were overcome with great and bitter sorrow when We learned that a
pernicious plan, by no means the first, had been undertaken, whereby the
most sacred books of the Bible are being spread everywhere in every
vernacular tongue, with new interpretations which are contrary to the
wholesome rules of the Church, and are skillfully turned into a
distorted sense. For, from one of the versions of this sort already
presented to Us we notice that such a danger exists against the sanctity
of purer doctrine, so that the faithful might easily drink a deadly
poison from those fountains from which they should drain 'waters of
saving wisdom' [Ecclus. 15:3]..." (Pope Pius VII, 1816 A.D.)

"For
you should have kept before your eyes the warnings which Our
predecessors have constantly given, namely, that, if the sacred books
are permitted everywhere without discrimination in the vulgar tongue,
more damage will arise from this than advantage. Furthermore, the Roman
Church, accepting only the Vulgate edition according to the well-known
prescription of the Council of Trent, disapproves the versions in other
tongues and permits only those which are edited with the explanations
carefully chosen from writings of the Fathers and Catholic Doctors, so
that so great a treasure may not be exposed to the corruptions of
novelties, and so that the Church, spread throughout the world, may be
'of one tongue and of the same speech' [Gen. 11:1]." (Pope Pius
VII, 1816 A.D.)

"Since
in vernacular speech we notice very frequent interchanges, varieties,
and changes, surely by an unrestrained license of Biblical versions that
changelessness which is proper to the divine testimony would be utterly
destroyed, and faith itself would waver, when, especially, from the
meaning of one syllable sometimes an understanding about the truth of a
dogma is formed. For this purpose, then, the heretics have been
accustomed to make their low and base machinations, in order that by the
publication of their vernacular Bibles, (of whose strange variety and
discrepancy they, nevertheless, accuse one another and wrangle) they
may, each one, treacherously insert their own errors wrapped in the more
holy apparatus of divine speech. 'For heresies are not born,' St.
Augustine used to say, 'except when the true Scriptures are not well
understood and when what is not well understood in them is rashly and
boldly asserted.' But, if we grieve that men renowned for piety and
wisdom have, by no means rarely, failed in interpreting the Scriptures,
what should we not fear if the Scriptures, translated into every vulgar
tongue [i.e. the languages of the people] whatsoever, are freely handed
on to be read by an inexperienced people who, for the most part, judge
not with any skill but with a kind of rashness?..." (Pope Pius VII,
1816 A.D.)

"The
wickedness of our enemies is progressing to such a degree that, besides
the flood of pernicious books hostile in themselves to religion, they
are endeavoring to turn to the harm of religion even the Sacred
Literature given to us by divine Providence for the progress of religion
itself. It is not unknown to you, Venerable Brethren, that a certain
'Society,' commonly called 'Biblical,' is boldly spreading through the
whole world, which, spurning the traditions of the Holy Fathers and
against the well-known decree of the Council of Trent, is aiming with
all its strength and means toward this: to translate - or rather
mistranslate - the Sacred Books into the vulgar tongue of every
nation... And to avert this plague, Our predecessors have published many
Constitutions... We, also, in accord with our Apostolic duty, encourage
you, Venerable Brothers, to be zealous in every way to remove your flock
away from these poisonous pastures. 'Reprove, entreat, be instant in
season, out of season, in all patience and doctrine' [2 Tim. 4:2], so
that your faithful people, clinging exactly to the regulations of our
Congregation of the Index, may be persuaded that, 'if the Sacred Books
are permitted everywhere without discrimination in the vulgar tongue,
more harm will arise therefrom than advantage, because of the boldness
of men.' Experience demonstrates the truth of this" (Pope Leo XII,
1824 A.D.)

"Among
the special schemes with which non-Catholics plot against the adherents
of Catholic truth to turn their minds away from the faith, the biblical
societies are prominent. They were first established in England and have
spread far and wide so that We now see them as an army on the march,
conspiring to publish in great numbers copies of the books of divine
Scripture. These are translated into all kinds of vernacular languages
for dissemination without discrimination among both Christians and
infidels. Then the biblical societies invite everyone to read them
unguided. Therefore it is just as [St.] Jerome complained in his day:
they make the art of understanding the Scriptures without a teacher
'common to babbling old women and crazy old men and verbose sophists,'
and to anyone who can read, no matter what his status. Indeed, what is
even more absurd and almost unheard of, they do not exclude the common
people of the infidels from sharing this kind of a knowledge. But you
know the aim of these societies. In his sacred writings, Peter, after
praising the letters of Paul, warns that in these epistles 'certain
things are difficult to understand, which the unlearned and the unstable
distort just as they do the rest of the Scriptures, which also leads to
their destruction.' He adds at once, 'Since you know this beforehand, be
on your guard lest, carried away by the error of the foolish, you fall
away from your own steadfastness.' Hence it is clear to you that even
from the first ages of Christianity this was a skill appropriate for
heretics. Having repudiated the given word of God and rejected the
authority of the Catholic Church, they either interpolate 'by artifice'
into the Scriptures or pervert 'its meaning through interpretation.' Nor
finally are you ignorant of the diligence and knowledge required to
faithfully translate into another language the words of the Lord. In the
many translations from the biblical societies, serious errors are easily
inserted by the great number of translators, either through ignorance or
deception. These errors, because of the very number and variety of
translations, are long hidden and hence lead the faithful astray. It is
of little concern to these societies if men reading their vernacular
Bibles fall into error. They are concerned primarily that the reader
becomes accustomed to judging for himself the meaning of the books of
Scripture, to scorning divine tradition preserved by the Catholic Church
in the teaching of the Fathers, and to repudiating the very authority of
the Church. For this end the same biblical societies never cease to
slander the Church and this Chair of Peter as if We have tried to keep
the knowledge of sacred Scripture from the faithful." (Pope Gregory
XVI, "Inter Praecipuas", 1844 A.D.)

"We
must also be wary of those who publish the Bible with new
interpretations contrary to the Church's laws. They skillfully distort
the meaning by their own interpretation. They print the Bibles in the
vernacular and, absorbing an incredible expense, offer them free even to
the uneducated. Furthermore, the Bibles are rarely without perverse
little inserts to insure that the reader imbibes their lethal poison
instead of the saving water of salvation. Long ago the Apostolic See
warned about this serious hazard to the faith and drew up a list of the
authors of these pernicious notions. The rules of this Index were
published by the Council of Trent; the ordinance required that
translations of the Bible into the vernacular not be permitted without
the approval of the Apostolic See and further required that they be
published with commentaries from the Fathers. The sacred Synod of Trent
had decreed in order to restrain impudent characters, that no one,
relying on his own prudence in matters of faith and of conduct which
concerns Christian doctrine, might twist the sacred Scriptures to his
own opinion, or to an opinion contrary to that of the Church or the
popes. Though such machinations against the Catholic faith had been
assailed long ago by these canonical proscriptions, Our recent
predecessors made a special effort to check these spreading evils. With
these arms may you too strive to fight the battles of the Lord which
endanger the sacred teachings, lest this deadly virus spread in your
flock." (Pope Pius VIII, "Traditi Humilitati", 1829
A.D.)

A.
Yes and no. As Crocker states, "Before the Albigensians, the Church
had happily translated the Bible into every vernacular tongue. But now
the Church saw the authority of the Bible abused by cult leaders who
preyed on the ignorance, or the latent extremism, of the people. In
1129, at the Council of Narbonne, in direct response to the abuses of
the Albigensians and related heresies, the Bible was forbidden to all
save priests, bishops, and others in religious vocations. The people
would hear the Bible in church. But mad-eyed fanatics would not be
allowed to wave the Bible above their heads and claim some new
revelation, some special reading - to common people who were mostly
illiterate - that denied the Trinity or endorsed fornication, abortion,
and suicide as positive deeds." Note that this act, often condemned
by those outside the Church, actually saved the lives of people who were
spared from the deadly errors of heretics.

A.
This question is commonly put forward by those outside the Catholic
Church who are attempting to portray the Church as an enemy of the
Bible. In reality, the Church is the Bible's greatest friend - it was
her children (under the influence of the Holy Spirit) who wrote the
New Testament, it was she who gathered and preserved the books, and it was she
who determined which books comprise the Bible. And, when poor
translations have arisen, she has taken steps to prevent her children
from reading these corrupt versions. The Church has not burnt
bibles to keep Scripture away from people. The Church has burnt
bibles - that is, poorly translated bibles - to protect her flock.
Remember that St. Peter says that scripture can be distorted to one's
destruction (see 2 Pt. 3:16), and history proves that corrupted scriptures can have dangerous consequences. Further, remember that the
burning of dangerous books is itself a biblical practice (see Acts
19:19).

A.
If the Catholic Church kept bibles from people, it was to protect them
(e.g. from the errors of heretics, from faulty translations, etc.). In
truth, the Catholic Church received, attested to and protected the
Bible. She also painstakingly propagated it by hand before printing
presses were invented. She has also included Scripture in her liturgy, granted
indulges for reading Scripture, taken songs and prayers from it, etc. If
the Church has at times indicated that Bible reading may not be
expedient for all, it should be noted that she has had good reason to do
so. Remember that the Bible is a difficult book that is easily subject
to misinterpretation. Certain uninstructed persons may misunderstand or
misapply certain passages with very detrimental effects (e.g. tearing
out one's eye, cutting off one's arm, promoting & justifying
violence, etc.). It is fair to ask, even today, 'Would you want an
uneducated person or your young child to read the Bible without proper
instruction / assistance / cautions?' Furthermore, those who put forth the argument that
the Catholic Church has kept bibles "chained up", should also
realize that their own bank or supermarket may keep their pens chained
up. While pens are "a dime a dozen", ancient bibles were
laboriously hand-copied at a high cost. Ask yourself, if the bank had
only a few pens and didn't chain them up, how long do you think it would
be before there were no more pens for you to use? Does the bank's
keeping the pens chained up keep you from using them or doesn't it
really keep them there so that when you want to use them, they will be
there? The same may be said of keeping ancient bibles "chained
up" - this kept them available, not unavailable! As Pope Leo XIII
states, "The calm and fair consideration of what has been said will
clearly show that the Church has never failed in taking due measures to
bring the Scriptures within reach of her children, and that she has ever
held fast and exercised profitably that guardianship conferred upon her
by Almighty God for the protection and glory of His Holy Word; so that
she has never required, nor does she now require, any stimulation from
without." (Pope Leo XIII, "Providentissimus Deus", 1893
A.D.)

A.
Each Catholic is different. Some know Scripture better than others. The
first Christians [that is, Catholics] would not have known any Scripture
at all since it was not yet written. Later, many Catholics knew
Scripture only through pictures and sermons since so much of the world's
population has historically been illiterate. Despite this however, a
Catholic who knows his faith well may be said to know the Bible
'implicitly', as it were. Furthermore, Catholics hear Scripture at Mass,
Catholics are encouraged to read Scripture, Catholics are granted
indulgences for the reading of Scripture, etc. While many so called
"bible-only Christians" claim to relish the Bible, many really
don't know the bible that well (they often just recite a few select verses). Furthermore, even what they do know is often
corrupted / out of context / distorted / etc. They reject oral Tradition
(which is unbiblical), reject the authority of the Church (who alone is
able to properly interpret Scripture), claim that the Bible is the sole
rule of faith (which is contrary to what the Bible itself teaches),
reject much of the teachings in the Bible (e.g. teachings on the papacy,
teachings against divorce, teachings regarding obedience, teachings
regarding the sacraments, among other things), yet they claim to be
biblical and they condemn Catholics (who do none of these things) as
unbiblical!

A.
Yes. Not only has she received it, attested to it and protected it for
2,000 years, but she has also taken painstaking care to propagate it,
despite the absence of printing presses / copiers / etc. She reads from
it at every Mass, adorns her liturgy and writings with it, uses it in
songs, etc. She grants indulgences for reading Holy Scripture and even
requires that her (physically able) members stand in respect for the reading of the Gospel
at every Mass.

A.
Although the Bible is very important to the Catholic faith, the Catholic
faith itself does not depend upon the Bible. Remember that the Church
existed before the Bible and that the Church determined which writings
comprise the Bible. Also, as the Bible states, not all things were
handed on in Scripture (2 Thes. 2:15). Furthermore, the Bible indicates that the Church
(not Holy Scripture) is the pillar and foundation of truth
(see 1 Tm. 3:15), that faith comes through hearing - not reading (see
Rom. 10:17), and it shows that the Apostles were sent forth to preach, not to
write (cf. Mk. 16:15). History shows that for the first few centuries the
Church did not even have an official Bible. When it did, most people
couldn't read it and all copies had to be made by hand (and were
therefore hard to come by).

A.
There are many benefits to be realized from Holy Scripture. For example,
"...sacred scriptures...are capable of giving you wisdom for
salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. All scripture is inspired by
God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for
training in righteousness, so that one who belongs to God may be
competent, equipped for every good work." (St. Paul, 2 Tm. 3:15-17). Also, "Indeed, the word of God is living and
effective, sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating even between
soul and spirit, joints and marrow, and able to discern reflections and
thoughts of the heart." (St. Paul, Heb. 4:12). The word of God is
also called " the helmet of salvation and the sword of the
Spirit" (Eph. 6:17) through which we may be instructed and have
hope (see Rom. 15:4).

"Love
the knowledge of the Scriptures and you will not love the errors of the
flesh." (St. Jerome, Doctor of the Church)

"[T]he
Gospel is a rudder to steer our way through life, and helps us to reach
the harbor of salvation." (St. Cyprian)

"Sacred
Scripture is set up as a kind of lantern for us in the night of this
life." (Pope St. Gregory I the Great, Doctor of the Church, c. 590
A.D.)

"The
study of the inspired Scripture is the chief way of finding our
duty." (St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the Church)

"Learn
the Heart of God in the words of God, that you may long more ardently
for things eternal." (Pope St. Gregory the Great, Doctor of the
Church)

"Thanks
be to the Gospel, by means of which we also, who did not see Christ when
He came into this world, seem to be with Him when we read His
deeds." (St. Ambrose, Doctor of the Church)

"If
aught could sustain and support a wise man in this life or help him to
preserve his equanimity amid the conflicts of the world, it is, I
reckon, meditation on and knowledge of the Bible." (St. Jerome,
Doctor of the Church)

"Just
as at sea, those who are carried away from the direction of the harbor
bring themselves back on course by a clear sign, so Scripture may guide
those adrift on the sea of life back into the harbor of the divine
will." (St. Gregory of Nyssa)

"When
you are really instructed in the Divine Scriptures, and have realized
that its laws and testimonies are the bonds of truth, then you can
contend with adversaries; then you will fetter them and lead them bound
into captivity; then of the foes you have made captive you will make
freemen of God." (St. Jerome, Doctor of the Church)

"Holy
Writ is set before the eye of the mind like a kind of mirror, that we
may see our inward face in it; for therein we learn the deformities,
therein we learn the beauties we possess; there we are made sensible of
what progress we are making, there too how far we are from
proficiency." (Pope St. Gregory I the Great, Doctor of the Church,
c. 604 A.D.)

"The
best guide you can find to the correct path is the serious study of the
Bible. There we can find rules for the conduct of our life and, in the
lives of great figures, living images of a life with God whose actions
we are encouraged to copy. Each person can concentrate on the area where
they feel themselves to be lacking and find, as in a hospital, a cure
for their particular trouble." (St. Basil the Great, Doctor of the
Church)

A.
The Bible often speaks in the masculine because this is a customary mode of
speech. Fortunately, the writers of Holy Scripture did not have to worry about
being "politically correct" when authoring the sacred books.

A.
Not only did Jesus quote from Scripture, show concern about fulfilling
prophecies of Scripture, say that "scripture cannot be set
aside" (Jn. 10:35), but he said specifically that he had come to
fulfill the law and the prophets (a reference to Old Testament
Scripture) [see Mt 5:17]. He also quoted from Scripture while he hung on
the cross (click here). As Pope Leo XIII has said,
"...[Jesus] quotes [Scripture] against Sadducees and Pharisees, and
retorts from them upon Satan himself when he dares to tempt Him. At the
close of His life His utterances are from Holy Scripture, and it is the
Scripture that He expounds to His disciples after His resurrection,
until He ascends to the glory of His Father" (Pope Leo XIII,
Providentissimus Deus). And, as Pope Benedict XV has stated, "We
know what He felt about Holy Scripture: when He said, 'It is written,'
and 'the Scripture must needs be fulfilled,' we have therein an argument
which admits of no exception and which should put an end to all
controversy. Yet it is worthwhile dwelling on this point a little: when
Christ preached to the people, whether on the Mount by the lakeside, or
in the synagogue at Nazareth, or in His own city of Capharnaum, He took
His points and His arguments from the Bible. From the same source came
His weapons when disputing with the Scribes and Pharisees. Whether
teaching or disputing He quotes from all parts of Scripture and takes
His example from it; He quotes it as an argument which must be accepted.
He refers without any discrimination of sources to the stories of Jonas
and the Ninivites, of the Queen of Sheba and Solomon, of Elias and
Eliseus, of David and of Noe, of Lot and the Sodomites, and even of
Lot's wife. (cf. Mt. 12:3, 39-42; Lk. 17:26-29, 32). How solemn His
witness to the truth of the sacred books: 'One jot, or one tittle shall
not pass of the Law till all be fulfilled' (Mt. 5:18); and again: 'The
Scripture cannot be broken' (Jn. 10:35); and consequently: 'He therefore
that shall break one of these least commandments, and shall so teach men
shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven' (Mt. 5:19). Before
His Ascension, too, when He would steep His Apostles in the same
doctrine: 'He opened their understanding that they might understand the
Scriptures. And He said to them: thus it is written, and thus it
behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise again from the dead the third
day' (Lk. 24:45)." (Pope Benedict XV, "Spiritus Paraclitus",
1920 A.D.)

A.
We see in the New Testament that Jesus often spoke in parables. Some
relevant quotations appear below.

"Yet
He spoke not in parables to the disciples, but to the multitude; and
even to this day the multitude hears in parables; and therefore it is
said, And without a parable He did not speak to them." (St. Jerome,
Doctor of the Church)

"The
reason why He spoke in parables the Evangelist subjoins, saying, That it
might be fulfilled that was spoken by the Prophet, saying, I will open
my mouth in parables, I will utter things kept secret from the
foundation of the world (Mt. 13:35)." (St. Augustine, Doctor of the
Church)

"That
which David had foretold in the person of Christ, 'I will open my mouth
in parables', the Lord here fulfills; as it is said, And when much
people were gathered together, and were come to him out of every city,
he spoke by a parable. But the Lord speaks by a parable, first indeed
that He may make His hearers more attentive. For men were accustomed to
exercise their minds on dark sayings, and to despise what was plain; and
next, that the unworthy might not receive what was spoken
mystically." (St. Theophylact)

"But
to those who are unworthy of such mysteries, they are obscurely spoken.
Hence it follows, But to the rest in parables, that seeing they might
not see, and hearing they might not understand. For they think they see,
but see not, and hear indeed, but do not understand. For this reason
Christ hides this from them, lest they should beget a greater prejudice
against them, if after they had known the mysteries of Christ, they
despised them. For he who understands and afterwards despises, shall be
more severely punished." (St. Theophylact)

"A
parable is a comparison made between things discordant by nature, under
some similitude. For parable is the Greek for a similitude, when we
point out by some comparisons what we would have understood. In this way
we say an iron man, when we desire that he should be understood to be
hardy and strong; when to be swift, we compare him to winds and birds.
But He speaks to the multitudes in parables, with His usual providence,
that those who could not take in heavenly things, might conceive what
they heard by an earthly similitude." ('Pseudo Jerome', as quoted
by St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church)

"Christ
spoke certain things in secret to the crowds, by employing parables in
teaching them spiritual mysteries which they were either unable or
unworthy to grasp: and yet it was better for them to be instructed in
the knowledge of spiritual things, albeit hidden under the garb of
parables, than to be deprived of it altogether. Nevertheless our Lord
expounded the open and unveiled truth of these parables to His
disciples, so that they might hand it down to others worthy of it;
according to 2 Timothy 2:2: 'The things which thou hast heard of me by
many witnesses, the same command to faithful men, who shall be fit to
teach others.' This is foreshadowed, Numbers 4, where the sons of Aaron
are commanded to wrap up the sacred vessels that were to be carried by
the Levites." (St. Thomas Aquinas, Doctor of the Church and
"greatest theologian in the history of the Church")

A.
Surprising as it may sound to modern ears, we have been told that
private reading of Holy Scripture may not be recommended for all. This
may be because (1) not all are properly instructed, (2) Scripture is not
easily comprehensible to all, (3) heretics may attempt to corrupt /
twist Scripture (which has led both to death and to spiritual ruin),
and (4) Scripture may be distorted to one's own destruction (see 2 Pt.
3:15-16). Applicable teachings in this regard follow.

Error
CONDEMNED in "Unigenitus": "The reading of Sacred
Scripture is for all." (Errors of Paschasius Quesnel, Condemned in
the dogmatic Constitution, "Unigenitus," Sept. 8, 1713)

Error
CONDEMNED in "Unigenitus": "It is useful and necessary at
all times, in all places, and for every kind of person, to study and to
know the spirit, the piety, and the mysteries of Sacred Scripture."
(Errors of Paschasius Quesnel, Condemned in the dogmatic Constitution,
"Unigenitus," Sept. 8, 1713)

Error
CONDEMNED in "Unigenitus": "The sacred obscurity of the
Word of God is no reason for the laity to dispense themselves from
reading it." (Errors of Paschasius Quesnel, Condemned in the
dogmatic Constitution, "Unigenitus," Sept. 8, 1713)

Error
CONDEMNED in "Unigenitus": "To forbid Christians to read
Sacred Scripture, especially the Gospels, is to forbid the use of light
to the sons of light, and to cause them to suffer a kind of
excommunication." (Errors of Paschasius Quesnel, Condemned in the
dogmatic Constitution, "Unigenitus," Sept. 8, 1713)

Error
CONDEMNED in "Unigenitus": "To snatch away from the hands
of Christians the New Testament, or to hold it closed against them by
taking away from them the means of understanding it, is to close for
them the mouth of Christ." (Errors of Paschasius Quesnel, Condemned
in the dogmatic Constitution, "Unigenitus," Sept. 8, 1713)

"Therefore,
in that famous letter of his to the faithful of the Church at Meta, Our
predecessor, Innocent III, quite wisely prescribes as follows: 'In truth
the secret mysteries of faith are not to be exposed to all everywhere,
since they cannot be understood by all everywhere, but only by those who
can grasp them with the intellect of faith. Therefore, to the more
simple the Apostle says: 'I gave you milk to drink as unto little ones
in Christ... [1 Cor. 3:2].' For solid food is for the elders, as he
said: 'We speak wisdom ... among the perfect' [1 Cor. 2:6]; 'for I
judged not myself to know anything among you, but Jesus Christ and Him
Crucified' [1 Cor. 2:2]. For so great is the depth of Divine Scripture
that not only the simple and the unlettered, but even the learned and
prudent are not fully able to explore the understanding of it.
Therefore, Scripture says that many 'searching have failed in their
search' [Ps. 63:7]." (Pope Pius VII, 1816 A.D.)

"...
lest, indeed, any simple and ignorant person should presume to reach the
sublimity of Sacred Scripture, or to preach it to others. For it is
written: Seek not the things that are too high for thee [Sir. 3:22]
Therefore, the Apostle warns not to be more wise than it behooveth to be
wise, but to be wise unto sobriety [Rom. 12:3]. But, noteworthy are the
Constitutions, not only of Innocent III, just mentioned, but also of
Pius IV, Clement VIII, and Benedict XIV in which the precaution was laid
down that, if Scripture should be easily open to all, it would perhaps
become cheapened and be exposed to contempt, or, if poorly understood by
the mediocre, would lead to error. But, what the mind of the Church is
in regard to the reading and interpretation of Scripture your fraternity
may know very clearly from the excellent Constitution of another of Our
predecessors, Clement XI, Unigenitus, in which those doctrines were
thoroughly condemned in which it was asserted that it is useful and
necessary to every age, to every place, to every type of person to know
the mysteries of Sacred Scripture, the reading of which was to be open
to all, and that it was harmful to withdraw Christian people from it,
nay more, that the mouth of Christ was closed for the faithful when the
New Testament was snatched from their hands" (Pope Pius VII, 1816
A.D.)

A.
If you are a Catholic who is able to read the Bible with profit and to
avoid all potential pitfalls, you most likely should read Holy Scripture. If
so, remember to read it properly and "with the mind of the
Church". Avoid the traps of private interpretation,
misinterpretation, etc. Be sure you use an appropriate Catholic bible
with footnotes that expound the traditional, true teachings of the
Church. And, don't forget to partake of the generous indulgences which
may be available for reading Scripture. If you are not able to avoid all
potential pitfalls, you may wish to look for assistance (e.g. from a
traditional Catholic priest / religious, from a traditional Catholic
publication, etc.) so that you may eventually be able to read Scripture
with profit and avoid all pitfalls.

Reminder:
Interpretation and application of Scripture should not be contrary to
the perennial, official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. Do not
take Scripture passages out of context. Do not inflict harm on yourself
or others, break laws, take unsuitable/incautious or
inappropriate/drastic actions, or take figurative items literally.

Some
quotations appear below...

"To
be ignorant of the Scripture is not to know Christ." (St. Jerome,
Doctor of the Church)

"A
man who is well grounded in the testimonies of the Scripture is the
bulwark of the Church." (St. Jerome, Doctor of the Church)

"Our
one desire for all the Church's children is that, being saturated with
the Bible, they may arrive at the all surpassing knowledge of Jesus
Christ." (Pope Benedict XV, "Spiritus Paraclitus", 1920)

"The
Emperor of heaven, the Lord of men and of angels, has sent you His
epistles for your life's advantage - and yet you neglect to read them
eagerly. Study them, I beg you, and meditate daily on the words of your
Creator. Learn the heart of God in the words of God, that you may sigh
more eagerly for things eternal, that your soul may be kindled with
greater longings for heavenly joys." (Pope St. Gregory I, Doctor of
the Church)

"Let
us mull over the words of the Gospel in frequent meditation, let us ever
keep in mind the examples of Mary, the blessed Mother of God, so that we
also may be found humble in the sight of God, that being subject in due
honor also to our neighbor, we may deserve together with her to be
exalted forever." (St. Bede the Venerable, Doctor of the Church)

"For
if the devil will not dare to approach a house where a Gospel is lying,
much less will any evil spirit, or any sinful nature, ever touch or
enter a soul which bears about with it such sentiments as it contains.
Sanctify then thy soul, sanctify thy body, by having these ever in thy
heart, and on thy tongue. For if foul speech defiles and invites devils,
it is clear that spiritual reading sanctifies and draws down the grace
of the Spirit." (St. John Chrysostom, Doctor of the Church)

"And
Benedict XV, on the occasion of the fifteenth centenary of the death of
St. Jerome, the greatest Doctor of the Sacred Scriptures, after having
most solemnly inculcated the precepts and examples of the same Doctor,
as well as the principles and rules laid down by Leo XIII and by
himself, and having recommended other things highly opportune and never
to be forgotten in this connection, exhorted 'all the children of the
Church, especially clerics, to reverence the Holy Scripture, to read it
piously and meditate it constantly'; he reminded them 'that in these
pages is to be sought that food, by which the spiritual life is
nourished unto perfection'" (Pope Pius XII, Divino Afflante Spiritu)

A.
Don't be discouraged. Even experts admit that it is difficult reading. If you find
the Bible "overwhelming", you may want to initially limit your
reading to certain areas (e.g. the Gospels). If you find the Bible hard to
comprehend, you may want to consider items which may make the Bible easier to
understand (see
question below).

A.
There are a variety of tools to assist one in better understanding the Bible.
For example, consider traditional Bible commentaries, sermons of the Saints,
papal documents, writings of the early Church Fathers, etc. Note: Be
cautious, however, of modern tools (e.g. 1960's and later) which may be
"infected with modernism".

A.
Yes. As Cardinal Newman states, "Reading, as we do, the Gospels
from our youth up, we are in danger of becoming so familiar with them as
to be dead to their force, and to view them as mere history."

A.
No. All bibles are not the same. Not only have heretics created their
own 'bibles' (which are likely to omit books, corrupt text, add
erroneous notations, etc.), but even so-called Catholic bibles may vary
widely in quality / accuracy / orthodoxy / etc. (even regardless of an
imprimatur).

A.
Yes. In fact, it matters very much. As indicated above, all bibles are not the same. Not only have heretics created their
own 'bibles' (which are likely to omit books, corrupt text, add
erroneous notations, etc.), but even so-called Catholic bibles may vary
widely in quality / accuracy / orthodoxy / etc. (even regardless of an
imprimatur). If you read a poor translation of Scripture, you may imbibe
any number of potentially harmful errors. Some translations of the bible
may rightly be called "spiritual poison" and warrant the
anathemas mentioned by the Apostles St. Paul and St. John in Holy
Scripture [St. Paul: "But even if we or an angel from heaven should
preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to you, let
that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say again, if
anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you received,
let that one be accursed!" (Gal. 1:8-9) St. John (the "apostle
of love"): "If anyone comes to you and does not bring this
doctrine, do not receive him in your house or even greet him; for
whoever greets him shares in his evil works." (2 Jn. 1:10-11)].

A.
There various editions / translations of the Bible because publishers
may be attempting to make them more "readable" or more
faithful to the original (or, unfortunately, in some cases to advance a
particular agenda). Some may attempt to update the bible into
"modern language". Also, there may be numerous editions
because publishers may try to appeal to different audiences (e.g. adults
/ teens / women / etc.) or to meet different needs (e.g. heirloom bible
/ study bible / large print bible / etc.). Note that various editions
which may seem different (based on the cover) may actually contain the
same translation inside.

A.
No. As indicated above, it simply means that nothing was found to
contradict faith or morals. Unfortunately, an imprimatur is only as good
as the issuer. Sadly, recent history has shown that imprimaturs may
sometimes be attached to translations which contain not only errors, but
even items which may be judged heretical by the standard of the
perennial Magisterium.

A.
There are a number of things to look at and watch for when selecting a
bible. For example:

*
The physical qualities of the Bible [e.g. is the text size adequate, is
it light enough/small enough for you to read/carry (if applicable), is
it sufficiently durable, are the pages too thick or thin, are the
margins sufficient (especially if you plan to mark in it), etc.]

*
The ease of readability (e.g. is the Bible is a language you can
understand, is the language understandable, etc.)

*
The referencing (e.g. is each verse clearly numbered and easy to
reference, is it easy to locate a particular verse, etc.)

*
Are the footnotes helpful/sufficient/appropriate (e.g. are there
sufficient footnotes, are they easy to get to, are they easy to read,
are they orthodox, etc.)?

*
Is the Bible appropriate for the use you intend (e.g. as a study bible,
heirloom bible, etc.)?

You
should also verify that:

*
The translation in question was not prepared in association with
non-Catholics

*
The translation in question does not contain inclusive language

*
The translation in question does not disparage the Blessed Virgin Mary
[it may be easiest to detect this by the wording and footnotes related
to Gen. 3:15 (traditional translations say "she shall crush thy
head, and thou shalt lie in wait for her heel"), Lk. 1:28
(traditional translations say "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is
with thee: blessed art thou among women"), Rv. 12:1 (traditional
translations see the allusion to the Blessed Virgin, whereas others may
see an allusion to anything but the Blessed Virgin)]

*
The translation in question does not cast doubt on Jesus' miracles, the
Resurrection, Catholic teaching, etc.

*
Phrases have not lost their meaning / import [e.g. consider the poor
modern translation of certain phrases, traditionally worded as
"peace to men of good will" (Luke 2:14) and "what shall
it profit a man, if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his
soul?" (Mk. 8:36)]

Of
course you should also verify that:

*
The Bible is truly Catholic

*
The Bible contains a valid imprimatur (however, remember that an
imprimatur still does not guarantee accuracy / orthodoxy / etc.)

Especially,
you should use great caution with modern (that is 1960's and later)
translations. Although they may be easier to read, they may distort the
true meaning of various passages or even call into question traditional
Catholic teachings. They may downplay the Virgin Mary's role and tend to
explain away 'tough passages'. The worst ones even question Jesus'
miracles and cast doubt on the Resurrection. You should avoid offensive
modern translations no matter how widely they may be used.

Finally,
you should remember that, unfortunately, many bible footnotes / bible
translations / bible commentaries / etc. of today may be infected with
errors and that various bibles purporting to be Catholic may actually be
heterodox translations. Therefore, you should use great care in
selecting a bible. Note: For more personal assistance in selecting a
Bible, try contacting a good, traditional Catholic bookseller.

A.
As indicated above, modern bible translations (e.g. 1960's and beyond)
may distort the true meaning of various passages or even call into
question traditional Catholic teachings. They may have an anti-Marian
bias. They may tend to explain away 'tough passages'. The worst ones
even question Jesus' miracles and cast doubt on the Resurrection. They
may have been made in conjunction with non-Catholics. They may contain
inclusive language. They may be 'Catholic' editions of Protestant
bibles. They may be heretical or support heresy. They may contain
footnotes / commentaries / etc. which are infected by errors. Etc. Etc.
Faithful Catholics should steer clear of such translations.

A.
The popes have warned about Modernists who use many methods to distort
Scripture or to call it into question. Some relevant quotations
regarding Modernists and Scripture appear below. Also, click
here for
more on Modernism [Latin Mass / Catholic Tradition Section]

"Nay,
rather, they do in fact describe it with no hesitation, so that you
would believe that they saw the very writers with their own eyes as they
applied their hand in every age to amplifying the Sacred Books.
Moreover, to support these actions they call to their aid a criticism
which they call textual; and they strive to convince us that this or
that fact or expression is not in its own place, and they bring forward
other such arguments. - You would indeed say that they had prescribed
for themselves certain types, as it were, of narrations and discourses,
as a result of which they decide with certainty what stands in its own
place or in a strange place. - Let him who wishes judge how skilled they
can be to make decisions in this way. Moreover, he who gives heed to
them as they talk about their studies on the Sacred Books, as a result
of which it was granted them to discover so many things improperly
stated, would almost believe that no man before them had turned the
pages of these same books; and that an almost infinite number of doctors
had not examined them from every point of view, a group clearly far
superior to them in mind, and erudition, and sanctity of life. These
very wise doctors indeed, far from finding fault with the Sacred
Scriptures in any part, rather, the more thoroughly they investigated
them, the more they gave thanks to divine authority for having deigned
so to speak with men. But alas, our doctors with respect to the Sacred
Books did not rely upon those aids on which the modernists did; thus
they did not have philosophy as a master and guide, nor did they choose
themselves as their own authority in making decisions. Now, then, we
think that it is clear of what sort the method of the modernists is in
the field of history. The philosopher goes ahead; the historian succeeds
him; right behind, in order, works criticism, both internal and textual.
And since it is characteristic of the first cause to communicate its
power to its consequences, it becomes evident that such criticism is not
criticism at all; that it is rightly called agnostic, immanentist, and
evolutionist; and that so, he who professes it and uses it, professes
the errors implicit in the same and opposes Catholic doctrine. - For
this reason it can seem most strange that criticism of this kind has
such weight today among Catholics. This obviously has a twofold cause:
first of all the pact by which the historians and the critics of this
kind are so closely joined, the differences of nationality and the
dissension of religions being placed in the background; then the endless
effrontery by which all with one voice extol whatever each of them
prattles, and attribute it to the progress of science; by which in close
array they attack him who wishes to examine the new marvel or his own;
by which they accuse him who denies it of ignorance, adorn him with
praises who embraces and defends it. Thus no small number are deceived
who, if they should examine the matter more closely, would be horrified.
From this powerful domineering on the part of those in error, and this
heedless compliance on the part of fickle souls, a corruption in the
surrounding atmosphere results which penetrates everywhere and diffuses
its pestilence." (Pope St. Pius X, "Pascendi dominici gregis",
1907 A.D.)

"Nor
do modern innovators stop here: they even try to claim St. Jerome as a
patron of their views on the ground that he maintained that historic
truth and sequence were not observed in the Bible, 'precisely as things
actually took place, but in accordance with what men thought at that
time,' and that he even held that this was the true norm for history. A
strange distortion of St. Jerome's words! He does not say that when
giving us an account of events the writer was ignorant of the truth and
simply adopted the false views then current; he merely says that in
giving names to persons or things he followed general custom. Thus the
Evangelist calls St. Joseph the father of Jesus, but what he meant by
the title 'father' here is abundantly clear from the whole context. For
St. Jerome 'the true norm of history' is this: when it is question of
such appellatives (as 'father,' etc), and when there is no danger or
error, then a writer must adopt the ordinary forms of speech simply
because such forms of speech are in ordinary use. More than this: Jerome
maintains that belief in the Biblical narrative is as necessary to
salvation as is belief in the doctrines of the faith" (Pope
Benedict XV, "Spiritus Paraclitus", 1920 A.D.)

"We,
Venerable Brethren, for whom there is but one and only truth, and who
hold that the Sacred Books, 'written under the inspiration of the Holy
Ghost, have God for their author' declare that this is equivalent to
attributing to God Himself the lie of utility or officious lie, and We
say with St. Augustine: 'In an authority so high, admit but one
officious lie, and there will not remain a single passage of those
apparently difficult to practice or to believe, which on the same most
pernicious rule may not be explained as a lie uttered by the author
willfully and to serve a purpose'. And thus it will come about, the holy
Doctor continues, that everybody will believe and refuse to believe what
he likes or dislikes. But the Modernists pursue their way gaily. They
grant also that certain arguments adduced in the Sacred Books, like
those, for example, which are based on the prophecies, have no rational
foundation to rest on. But they will defend even these as artifices of
preaching, which are justified by life. Do they stop here? No, indeed,
for they are ready to admit, nay, to proclaim that Christ Himself
manifestly erred in determining the time when the coming of the Kingdom
of God was to take place, and they tell us that we must not be surprised
at this since even Christ was subject to the laws of life! After this
what is to become of the dogmas of the Church? The dogmas brim over with
flagrant contradictions, but what matter that since, apart from the fact
that vital logic accepts them, they are not repugnant to symbolical
truth. Are we not dealing with the infinite, and has not the infinite an
infinite variety of aspects? In short, to maintain and defend these
theories they do not hesitate to declare that the noblest homage that
can be paid to the Infinite is to make it the object of contradictory
propositions! But when they justify even contradiction, what is it that
they will refuse to justify?" (Pope St. Pius X, "Pascendi
Dominici Gregis", 1907)

A.
Unfortunately, especially since the Second Vatican Council, the Church
has been plagued by dissident biblical 'scholars'. Worse yet, many of
these modernist 'scholars' are not censured for their heterodox works.
While some recent scholarship may be beneficial, much seems in direct
contradiction to the admonitions of the perennial Magisterium.

A.
The 'attack on revelation' may refer to modernists attempt to deny the
supernatural in Scripture, explain it away, distort its meaning, etc. As
Pope Leo XIII has said, "But first it must be clearly understood
whom we have to oppose and contend against, and what are their tactics
and their arms. In earlier times the contest was chiefly with those who,
relying on private judgment and repudiating the divine traditions and
teaching office of the Church, held the Scriptures to be the one source
of revelation and the final appeal in matters of Faith. Now, we have to
meet the Rationalists, true children and inheritors of the older
heretics, who, trusting in their turn to their own way of thinking, have
rejected even the scraps and remnants of Christian belief which had been
handed down to them. They deny that there is any such thing as
revelation or inspiration, or Holy Scripture at all; they see, instead,
only the forgeries and the falsehoods of men; they set down the
Scripture narratives as stupid fables and lying stories: the prophecies
and the oracles of God are to them either predictions made up after the
event or forecasts formed by the light of nature; the miracles and the
wonders of God's power are not what they are said to be, but the
startling effects of natural law, or else mere tricks and myths; and the
Apostolic Gospels and writings are not the work of the Apostles at all.
These detestable errors, whereby they think they destroy the truth of
the divine Books, are obtruded on the world as the peremptory
pronouncements of a certain newly-invented 'free science;' a science,
however, which is so far from final that they are perpetually modifying
and supplementing it. And there are some of them who, notwithstanding
their impious opinions and utterances about God, and Christ, the Gospels
and the rest of Holy Scripture, would fain be considered both
theologians and Christians and men of the Gospel, and who attempt to
disguise by such honorable names their rashness and their pride. To them
we must add not a few professors of other sciences who approve their
views and give them assistance, and are urged to attack the Bible by a
similar intolerance of revelation. And it is deplorable to see these
attacks growing every day more numerous and more severe. It is sometimes
men of learning and judgment who are assailed; but these have little
difficulty in defending themselves from evil consequences. The efforts
and the arts of the enemy are chiefly directed against the more ignorant
masses of the people. They diffuse their deadly poison by means of
books, pamphlets, and newspapers; they spread it by addresses and by
conversation; they are found everywhere; and they are in possession of
numerous schools, taken by violence from the Church, in which, by
ridicule and scurrilous jesting, they pervert the credulous and unformed
minds of the young to the contempt of Holy Scripture. Should not these
things, Venerable Brethren, stir up and set on fire the heart of every
Pastor, so that to this 'knowledge, falsely so called,' may be opposed
the ancient and true science which the Church, through the Apostles, has
received from Christ, and that Holy Scripture may find the champions
that are needed in so momentous a battle?" (Pope Leo XIII, "Providentissimus
Deus", 1893)

A.
According to the First Vatican Council, "If anyone says that all
miracles are impossible, and that therefore all reports of them, even
those contained in Sacred Scripture, are to be set aside as fables or
myths; or that miracles can never be known with certainty, nor can the
divine origin of the Christian religion be proved from them: let him be
anathema."

A.
No. As Pope Leo XIII has stated, "But it is absolutely wrong and
forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy
Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred. For the system
of those who, in order to rid themselves of these difficulties, do not
hesitate to concede that divine inspiration regards the things of faith
and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think) in a
question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not
so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind
in saying it - this system cannot be tolerated. For all the books which
the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and
entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and
so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with
inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with
error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it
is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which
is not true. This is the ancient and unchanging faith of the Church,
solemnly defined in the Councils of Florence and of Trent, and finally
confirmed and more expressly formulated by the [First] Council of the
Vatican. These are the words of the last: 'The Books of the Old and New
Testament, whole and entire, with all their parts, as enumerated in the
decree of the same Council (Trent) and in the ancient Latin Vulgate, are
to be received as sacred and canonical. And the Church holds them as
sacred and canonical, not because, having been composed by human
industry, they were afterwards approved by her authority; nor only
because they contain revelation without error; but because, having been
written under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, they have God for their
author.' Hence, because the Holy Ghost employed men as His instruments,
we cannot therefore say that it was these inspired instruments who,
perchance, have fallen into error, and not the primary author. For, by
supernatural power, He so moved and impelled them to write - He was so
present to them - that the things which He ordered, and those only,
they, first, rightly understood, then willed faithfully to write down,
and finally expressed in apt words and with infallible truth. Otherwise,
it could not be said that He was the Author of the entire Scripture.
Such has always been the persuasion of the Fathers. 'Therefore,' says
St. Augustine, 'since they wrote the things which He showed and uttered
to them, it cannot be pretended that He is not the writer; for His
members executed what their Head dictated.' And St. Gregory the Great
thus pronounces: 'Most superfluous it is to inquire who wrote these
things - we loyally believe the Holy Ghost to be the Author of the book.
He wrote it Who dictated it for writing; He wrote it Who inspired its
execution." (Pope Leo XIII, "Providentissimus Deus", 1893)

A.
Bible references usually contain the name of the book (or its
abbreviation), along with the chapter and verse number(s). For example,
the reference "Jn. 1:1" refers to the Gospel according to St.
John, Chapter 1, Verse 1. The reference "Jn. 1:1-10" refers to
the Gospel according to St. John, Chapter 1, Verses 1 through 10.

A.
Traditionally, Scripture readings at Mass were based on a 1 year cycle.
They were taken from the only 'canonized' translation of the Bible in
the history of the Church (the Vulgate). Since the Novus Ordo Mass of
the 1960's was imposed on the faithful (click here for more
information), a 3 year cycle was adopted and readings are taken from a
modern translation of the Bible. Adherents praise the fact that more
Scripture is read at Mass. Others point to poor translations, heavily
edited passages, important omissions, etc., and point out that less
repetition leads to less retention and less familiarity. Also, there is
concern that with the increase of Scripture and explanations of it at
Mass (e.g. the often lengthy homily) as well as the increased emphasis
of it at Mass (e.g. "the parade" of the book before the Gospel
reading, the new Mass division - the "liturgy of the word",
etc.), comes the decreased emphasis on the fact that Mass is a true
Sacrifice and is the true re-presentation of Calvary (it is not
'Bible study'!). Note: For more on the difference between the
Traditional Mass and the New (Novus Ordo) Mass, click
here.

A.
We may reference Scripture both from the Douay Rheims version of
Scripture and also from modern translations. While we find some things
in modern translations troubling, we also know that certain truths
speak for themselves, even despite potentially less desirable (or even
less precise) wording and troublesome headers/footnotes. While we may
not prefer modern Bible translations, we know that they may be the only
translations that Catholics of today are familiar with. They may also be
more easily understandable to "the average reader". Note: Click here for
'where do we stand/how traditional are we?'

A.
No. We do not recommend any particular Bible translation, even if we
quote from it. As indicated previously, we, being mere laypersons with
no authority in the Church, cannot provide Bible recommendations.
Instead, we suggest you look to the pronouncements of the perennial
Magisterium for recommendations.

A.
Bible footnotes may be critical to understanding various passages of
Scripture. They are not included here, however, since Scripture herein
is not comprehensive. That is one reason why we recommend that you refer
to your own appropriate Catholic Bible. Reminder: While Bible
footnotes are very important, you should keep in mind that footnotes -
especially in modern bible translations (e.g. 1960's and beyond) - may
be troublesome / heterodox / erroneous / etc.

A.
No. The use of Protestant 'bibles', which may corrupt passages, contain
heretical footnotes / comments / etc. may be dangerous to the faith. As
Scripture itself says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven
should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to
you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say
again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you
received, let that one be accursed!" (St. Paul,
Gal. 1:8-9) And, "After a first and second warning, break off
contact with a heretic, realizing that such a person is perverted and
sinful and stands self-condemned." (St. Paul, Ti. 3:10-11) Note
that, traditionally, Protestant 'bibles' have been viewed as
"spiritual poison".

A.
Yes. As the Catechism of Pope St. Pius X states, "The Church
forbids Protestant bibles because, either they have been altered and
contain errors, or not having her approbation and footnotes explaining
the obscure meanings, they may be harmful to the Faith." Protestant
'bibles' may omit entire books or passages, they may corrupt various
passages, they may contain heretical footnotes / comments, etc.
Traditionally, they may be viewed as "spiritual poison".

A.
Generally speaking, yes. However, well-educated and prayerful persons
may be able to make some use of these 'bibles' for apologetics purposes
(note that it may be more effective to disprove Protestant errors using
the error holder's own 'bible'). Remember, though, that one should not
assume that he / she can "peruse heretical bibles unscathed".
Even brilliant Doctors of the Church have recognized the danger and
prayed that they would not be harmed when they engaged in such works.

A.
Yes. For example, Martin Luther intentionally corrupted Rom. 3:28 to support his doctrine that one is saved by 'faith alone'. He knew that the original text did not support his addition of the word "alone", but he inserted it anyway.

A.
To tell if a translation of Holy Scripture is Catholic, try examining
who translated it. Look to see if there is an imprimatur (use special care with those issued in the 1960's and later). Look to see if
it is missing books that Protestants reject (or if they are relegated to
the back or between the Old and New Testaments or are otherwise
segregated). If all else fails, consider some key Catholic phrases that
a Protestant 'bible' is likely to attempt to contradict or gloss over (e.g.
regarding the Papacy, Mary, necessity of works, etc.). Do not purchase a
translation of the bible unless you are certain that it is an
appropriate Catholic bible. If you need further assistance, try
contacting a good, traditional Catholic bookseller.

A.
Typically, Protestants may reject the following books of Holy Scripture
(the Deuterocanonicals): Tobias, Judith, Wisdom,
Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, 1 Machabees, 2 Machabees, as well as parts of Esther and
parts of Daniel. Note that
some Protestant 'bibles' may contain these books (or may relegate them
to the back or otherwise segregate them). Some heretics (e.g. Martin
Luther) wanted to remove even more books (e.g. James and the
Apocalypse). Those
who reject the Church's canon and remove any books of Scripture do this
on their own 'authority', basing their actions on the fact that Jews
after Christ's death rejected these books. Remember, however that Jesus
and the Apostles accepted the deuterocanonical books since they quoted
from a translation of Scripture that contained these books (see
"Deuterocanonicals" and "Septuagint" above).
Furthermore, note that those who reject books of the bible are under the anathema of
the First Vatican Council: "If anyone does not admit as sacred and
canonical the complete books of Sacred Scripture with all their parts,
as the holy Council of Trent enumerated them, or denies that they were
divinely inspired: let him be anathema."

A.
All New Testament Scripture that Protestants have they actually got from
the Catholic Church (they would however proceed to corrupt some of it -
and, by their own admission, even popular Protestant translations have
been fraught with errors).

A
Yes, the Bible does prove the Catholic faith. Even Protestant 'bibles'
may be used to prove the Catholic faith. True, uncorrupted translations
of Scripture do not prove the Protestant faith. Although Protestants may
believe their Protestant faith is proved by Scripture, knowledgeable
Catholics know that their arguments are often illogical / taken out of
context / distorted / etc. Even their basis of "bible alone"
falls apart since the Bible actually condemns this central thesis of
theirs (for example, see 2 Thes. 2:15). It should be noted that Protestants may believe that the
Catholic faith is disproved by Scripture - and they may adduce certain
passages of Scripture in an attempt to prove their point. Again,
knowledgeable Catholics know that their arguments are often illogical /
taken out of context / distorted / etc. Unfortunately, however,
non-Catholics will often use these "proof texts" on
unsuspecting, uneducated Catholics to dissuade them from their faith.
Such unfortunate occurrences may be best prevented with proper education
(including basic
apologetics courses). It is a fact that the Catholic faith alone is the only truly biblical faith.
Note: For more on errors of non-Catholics, try
the Non-Catholics
Section.

A.
Of course not! The Bible is a Catholic work! Protestants wouldn't even
have a bible (New Testament) if not for the Catholic Church who received, attested to, protected, and preserved Holy Scripture for
around 1,500 years before the first Protestant even existed.

A.
No. Considering that Protestants may be assumed to be biased against the
Church and her teachings and closed to the teaching authority of the
Church, and that they hold heretical doctrines, and considering that
their 'bibles' contain omissions / corruptions / etc. (or
"spiritual poison"), it is clearly unwise to engage in
"bible study" with them. Furthermore, one should consider the
admonitions of the popes / saints / etc. and especially consider what
Scripture itself says, "But even if we or an angel from heaven
should preach (to you) a gospel other than the one that we preached to
you, let that one be accursed! As we have said before, and now I say
again, if anyone preaches to you a gospel other than the one that you
received, let that one be accursed!" (St. Paul,
Gal. 1:8-9) And, "After a first and second warning, break off
contact with a heretic, realizing that such a person is perverted and
sinful and stands self-condemned." (St. Paul, Ti. 3:10-11)

A.
As indicated above, you should not engage in Scripture study with
non-Catholics or read non-Catholic scripture items because it may
present a danger to your faith. Consider the warning of St. Vincent of
Lerins who states, "Here, possibly, some one may ask, Do heretics
also appeal to Scripture? They do indeed, and with a vengeance; for you
may see them scamper through every single book of Holy Scripture -
through the books of Moses, the books of Kings, the Psalms, the
Epistles, the Gospels, the Prophets. Whether among their own people, or
among strangers, in private or in public, in speaking or in writing, at
convivial meetings, or in the streets, hardly ever do they bring forward
anything of their own which they do not endeavor to shelter under words
of Scripture. Read the works of Paul of Samosata, of Priscillian, of
Eunomius, of Jovinian, and the rest of those pests, and you will see an
infinite heap of instances, hardly a single page, which does not bristle
with plausible quotations from the New Testament or the Old. But the
more secretly they conceal themselves under shelter of the Divine Law,
so much the more are they to be feared and guarded against. For they
know that the evil stench of their doctrine will hardly find acceptance
with any one if it be exhaled pure and simple. They sprinkle it over,
therefore, with the perfume of heavenly language, in order that one who
would be ready to despise human error, may hesitate to condemn divine
words. They do, in fact, what nurses do when they would prepare some
bitter draught for children; they smear the edge of the cup all round
with honey, that the unsuspecting child, having first tasted the sweet,
may have no fear of the bitter. So too do these act, who disguise
poisonous herbs and noxious juices under the names of medicines, so that
no one almost, when he reads the label, suspects the poison... Heretics,
in quoting Scripture, follow the example of the Devil. But some one will
say, What proof have we that the Devil is wont to appeal to Holy
Scripture? Let him read the Gospels wherein it is written, 'Then the
Devil took Him (the Lord the Savior) and set Him upon a pinnacle of the
Temple, and said unto Him: If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down,
for it is written, He shall give His angels charge concerning thee, that
they may keep thee in all thy ways: In their hands they shall bear thee
up, lest perchance thou dash thy foot against a stone.' What sort of
treatment must men, insignificant wretches that they are, look for at
the hands of him who assailed even the Lord of Glory with quotations
from Scripture? 'If thou be the Son of God,' saith he, 'cast thy self
down.' Wherefore? 'For,' saith he, 'it is written.' It behooves us to
pay special attention to this passage and bear it in mind, that, warned
by so important an instance of Evangelical authority, we may be assured
beyond doubt, when we find people alleging passages from the Apostles or
Prophets against the Catholic Faith, that the Devil speaks through their
mouths. For as then the Head spoke to the Head, so now also the members
speak to the members, the members of the Devil to the members of Christ,
misbelievers to believers, sacrilegious to religious, in one word,
Heretics to Catholics." As St. Ambrose warns, "Let not the
heretic entrap you by bringing examples from the Scriptures. The devil
makes use of the testimony of the Scriptures not to teach but to
deceive." (St. Ambrose, Doctor of the Church)

A.
Persons who accept other 'scriptures' besides the canonical books of the
Old and New Testaments have been anathematized. Consider the following:
"If anyone either believes that any scriptures, except those which
the Catholic Church has received, ought to be held in authority or
venerates them...let him be anathema." (Creed of the Council of
Toledo, 400/447 A.D.)

A.
According to Tertullian, heretics cannot be called Christians and not
being Christians, they have no right to Christian literature (which could
only have been obtained by taking it from the Catholic Church):
"These things being so, in order that we may be judged to have the
truth - we who walk in the rule which the [Catholic] Churches have handed down from
the Apostles, the Apostles from Christ, and Christ from God - admit that
the reasonableness of our position is clear, defining as it does that
heretics ought not to be allowed to challenge an appeal to the
Scriptures, since we, without using Scripture, prove that they have
nothing to do with the Scriptures. If they are heretics, they cannot be
Christians, because it is not from Christ that they have gotten what
they pursue of their own choosing, and from which they incur the name
heretic. Not being Christians, they have acquired no right to Christian
literature; and it might be justly said to them, 'Who are you? When and
from where did you come? Since you are not of mine, what are you doing
with what is mine? Indeed, Marcion, by what right do you chop in my
forest? By whose permission, Valentine, do you do you divert my streams?
By what authority, Apelles, do you move my boundary markers? And the
rest of you, why do you sow and graze here at your own pleasure? This is
my property, which I have long possessed, which I possessed before you
came, and for which I have a sure title from the very authors whose
property it was. I am the heir of the Apostles. As they carefully
prepared their will, as they committed it to a trust, and as they sealed
it with an oath, so do I hold the inheritance. You certainly, they
always held as disinherited, and they rejected you as strangers and
enemies." [Tertullian ("an excellent early Christian
writer" - although he would ultimately fall into heresy), c. 200
A.D.]

A.
Such non-Catholic religions, being outside the only true religion, apparently
do not
feel bound by the fixed truths that were handed down by the Apostles. While we
cannot speak to their motives, we can condemn their actions. Certainly no
one on earth - not even the Pope - has the right to "add to" or
"re-make" Holy Scripture.

"I learned a lot from this
book, even though I'm Catholic educated and know quite a bit about the
Bible." (CBF Previewer)

Kindle Version Just $6.99

Notice: Prices are subject to change
without notice and do not include any applicable taxes.

"For the Sacred Books were not given by God to men to satisfy
their curiosity or to provide them with material for study and research,
but, as the Apostle observes, in order that these Divine Oracles might
'instruct us to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus' and
'that the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good
work.'" (Pope Pius XII, "Divino Afflante Spiritu")

Important
Notice:
Items herein are provided for informational purposes only and
are not comprehensive. Terms may have more than one meaning.
Terms / definitions may be partial / incomplete, unscholarly,
etc. Definitions may vary. Wording, translation, punctuation,
capitalization, etc. may vary. Scripture references and
translations may vary. We may change punctuation, wording,
capitalization, shorten items, etc. All applicable items subject
to change without notice. We do not guarantee accuracy or
completeness of any item herein. We make no guarantees regarding
any item herein. We recommend reading Scripture in full context
in an appropriate Catholic Bible. Consult appropriate, competent
Church authorities for assistance in interpreting / applying
Scripture. Interpretation and application of Scripture should
not be contrary to the perennial, official teaching of the Roman
Catholic Church. Do not take Scripture passages out of context.
Do not inflict harm on yourself or others, break laws, take
unsuitable/incautious or inappropriate/drastic actions, or take
figurative items literally. We are not responsible for any
interpretation / misinterpretation, application /
misapplication, use / misuse, etc. of Scripture. Use of site is
at your own risk and is subject to our terms of use. By using
this site you indicate agreement to all terms. Click
here for important
cautionary statement and other important terms/information

We make no guarantees regarding any item herein.
By using this site you indicate agreement to all terms. For more terms
information, see "Important Notice" above and click
here.

"This 'unique', tradition-minded coloring book
which contains some of the most popular Catholic prayers in Latin is a fun way
to become more familiar with Latin prayers & increase Latin language retention!"

An enjoyable and
instructive tool with respect to Latin (the 'beautiful & majestic language of
heaven' and 'official language of the Church' - a language 'consecrated' by the
inscription on the Cross that helps to foster a universal bond in prayer with
Catholics around the world), this publication is suitable for Catholics of most any
age.

+ + +

"This Catholic coloring book
- which provides hours of wholesome & educational recreation - is so much better
for your soul than television!"

+ + +

Paperback Just $7.99

Notice: Prices are subject to change
without notice and do not include any applicable taxes.

This 'Catholic Classic', which offers consoling
'proof' that the faithful departed remember, love & care for those in heaven and
for those still remaining on earth, is a "great balm of comfort" to those who
have lost a spouse, child, parent, friend, or other loved one. "A thoughtful
bereavement gift, and a 'must-have' for grieving Catholics!"

Includes: Facts which demonstrate that Luther
was NOT sent by God, Luther received approval of his teaching from Satan,
Luther's misbehavior, some results of Luther's teachings, Luther admits he could
be wrong, and more...

Thank you for being part of over 6,000,000
visitors to MyCatholicSource.com since 2009! *

+All ads subject to our terms. Price
indicated may be base price for non-refundable processing fee,
excluding tax, optional ad enhancements, etc. "Place your ad" /
"list your business" / "list your Catholic product or service free"
/ etc. is not a guarantee that any ad will appear on this site.
Payment of processing fee does not assure appearance of ad on site.
References to target cycles (e.g. "just $##.##/yr.") are not
guarantees [ads that appear on the site may appear for a longer or
shorter time than the indicated target cycles (e.g. from 0 days to
multiples of a target cycle)] and are subject to change at any time
without notice (either retroactively or on a go-forward basis,
either individually / selectively / grouped / or in total).

Reminders: You may not
copy / distribute (including via e-mail, website, etc.) / sell /
etc. information contained on this site (or any images) or use them
for any commercial purpose whatsoever. All applicable content is
owned by us and is protected by copyright laws. Any unauthorized
reproduction / distribution / use of such content is prohibited by
law and may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Note that
we reserve the right to prosecute violators to the maximum extent
possible. Also note that views of others do not necessarily reflect our
views. We make no guarantees regarding any item herein and we not
responsible/liable for any consequences which may occur as a -
direct or indirect - result of use of this site. By using this site
(or associated materials), you agree to hold us harmless for all
damages in connection with use of this site (or other materials),
regardless of their nature. Remember that we are not a party to
others' transactions / activities (including posting, browsing of
posts/ads, transfers, contacts / correspondence, etc.) even if
information regarding the transactions / activities appears on this
site or other materials of ours, and that we do not mediate
disputes. You are solely responsible for all consequences of your
transactions / activities. Use of this site is at your own risk,
with no liability whatsoever to us. By using this site, you agree to
all terms. For more terms information, click here.